Hearing Entitled: Member Day

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

The Committee on Financial Services will come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess of the committee at any time. This hearing is titled "Member Day." Without objection, all members will have five legislative days within which to submit extraneous materials to the chair for inclusion in the record. I now recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. Welcome to today's Member Day. We welcome all of our members on and off the committee who are joining us to give testimony on their bills and legislative solutions that fall under the Financial Services Committee's jurisdiction. Your work and experience will give members of this committee a unique perspective into legislation that we might consider in the course of this Congress. As we work to usher in a new era of our financial regulatory agencies under President Trump, the work that we're doing today is more important than ever. Consumers need protection, small businesses and entrepreneurs need access to capital, and financial institutions need the opportunity to innovate. At the beginning of the 119th Congress, I shared my vision for our committee: right-size the regulatory system for financial institutions, particularly community banks; deliver clear rules of the road for the digital asset ecosystem; and ensure that agencies are focused on their core, statutorily directed missions. During our first six months, the committee Republicans have delivered on this agenda by passing comprehensive digital asset legislation for both a dollar-backed payment stablecoin and an overall financial market structure; passing over 25 bills that strengthen community banking and expand access to capital for entrepreneurs; reviewing the Federal Reserve Board's monetary policy decisions through our committee's new Task Force on Monetary Policy, Treasury Market Resilience, and Economic Prosperity; passing legislation to defend the United States and its allies against China; examining housing challenges that too many Americans face and recognizing the limitations of previous failed housing efforts; and conducting oversight of the Biden administration's actions, such as shedding light on politically motivated debanking efforts like Operation Choke Point 2.0 and environmental, social, governance mandates. I look forward to hearing the testimony from our panels today on how we can work together over the rest of this Congress to further accomplish our committee's goals. And I yield back.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

This will be the best speech you hear all week because it's the shortest.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Um, may I recognize you for 5 minutes? Is

SPEAKER_UNKNOWN

that all

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

you got? You don't— you

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

don't— I just gave this. I finished my speech.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

And the gentleman yields back for an opening statement. We have our witnesses today divided into two panels. The first panel, we welcome the testimony of Honorable Troy Downing of Montana, the Sarah McBride, representative from Delaware, and the Honorable Nellie Pou of the state of New Jersey. We're glad all of you are with us, and we'll start with Representative Downing, and you're recognized for your oral remarks for 5 minutes.

Rep. Troy Downing (R-MT)SPEAKER_05

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm very honored to be on this committee. I probably worked harder getting on this committee than I did on my campaign. Wanted to make sure that I hit the ground running with my private sector experience in technology, in technology venture, in insurance, and then also I spent the last four years as a regulator, the insurance and securities regulator for the state of Montana. I wanted to make sure that I hit the ground running, and I'm really excited about the work we do on this, from ensuring the United States remains a hotbed of innovation to helping small businesses access capital, to repealing senseless regulations on banks that only reduce access to credit for those who need it most. But today, I'd like to spend my time highlighting one of my top legislative priorities, which is eliminating the Federal Insurance Office. As a former regulator of insurance for the state of Montana, I know that state-based regulation works, works in the insurance industry. The McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 makes it very clear that states have the sole regulatory authority over the insurance industry. The 2010 Dodd-Frank Act upended decades of this practice by creating the Federal Insurance Office to monitor all aspects of insurance. And one could ask the obvious question: if insurance is regulated by the states, why do we have a Federal Insurance Office? And worst of all, with FIO, I'll call it for short, the Biden administration weaponized FIO pursuing politicized data calls on climate rather than looking for ways to make the insurance sector operate more efficiently. They weaponized this and usurped the states' authority doing these data calls on domestic insurance companies rather than leaving that where it truly belongs, with the states. So, the first bill that I introduced as a member of Congress was H.R. 643, the Federal Insurance Office Elimination Act. With strong support from the insurance industry, as the name suggests, this legislation simply eliminates the Federal Insurance Office and returns the regulation of insurance to the states where it belongs. Let me be clear. I did not come to Washington to slash and burn. I came to Washington to advocate for targeted regulatory reforms. I understand the Federal Insurance Office does some important work, particularly when it comes to representing the industry in the international stage, and I promise to make sure that that work continues. Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you and insurance stakeholders to advance this legislation and preserve state-based regulation, because states are best equipped to address the insurance needs of their communities, not the federal government. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Gentleman yields back. Representative McBride, you're recognized for 5 minutes. And I should have said at the top that each of you will be recognized for your oral presentation. Without objection, your written statements will be included as part of the record. And now, Representative McBride, I yield to you.

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE)SPEAKER_02

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very much to you and Ranking Member Waters for hosting this member hearing today. I'm here to discuss my bipartisan bill, H.R. 306, the Ending Scam Credit Repair Act, ESCRA. I'd like to thank my colleague, Representative Young Kim, for serving as the Republican co-lead of this legislation. We've all seen the commercials for so-called credit repair organizations, also known as CROs—shiny promises and toll-free numbers offering miraculous credit score boosts. But what we don't see behind these advertisements is the deception, the abuse, and the heartbreak. Behind the curtain are CROs exploiting legal loopholes, charging high upfront fees, taking advantage of confused constituents, and overwhelming financial institutions with manipulative tactics, leaving vulnerable Americans worse off than before. Our bill cracks down on these abusive and fraudulent practices by CROs. It prohibits them from charging upfront fees until at least 6 months after they've provided proof of real credit score improvement. While this protection already exists in federal law, CROs exploit a loophole to rip consumers off anyway. As long as they don't use certain telemarketing sales practices, they're able to evade this critical consumer protection. Our bill rightfully closes that loophole. ESCRA also prohibits CROs from jamming financial institutions with duplicative requests, which have prevented these institutions from addressing legitimate credit report issues. Additionally, ESCRA strengthens state oversight, raises penalties for bad actors, and ensures that every consumer knows their rights, that they can do all of this on their own for free. Our bill doesn't punish legitimate services. It protects the ethical actors who are trying to do the right thing. Both the financial services industry and consumer advocates, groups that rarely align, support ESCRA. This legislation exemplifies how Congress is supposed to work, bringing people together to improve life for our constituents. Preventing scams is not a partisan issue. In Delaware, I've spoken with hardworking families who, in moments of financial stress, turned to these companies believing help was on the way. Instead, they were met with high costs, false hope, and ultimately more debt and confusion. That's not just immoral, it should be illegal. Thank you, and I urge the committee to consider this much-needed bipartisan legislation. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Thank you very much for your effort today. Representative Pou, you're recognized for 5 minutes.

Rep. Nellie Pou (D-NJ)SPEAKER_00

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to Ranking Member Waters. Good afternoon. It is indeed my pleasure to offer testimony to the House Financial Services Committee as you set your agenda for the 119th Congress. One of the challenges that keeps my constituents up at night is housing. New Jersey is one of the— is, is is the most densely populated state in the union, and the need for affordable housing far exceeds supplies. More than 200,000 affordable homes are needed for low-income people in our state, where the average price of a home has increased 66% over the past 5 years. For those who dream of being homeowners, high rental prices combined with low housing availability make it difficult for New Jerseyans to save enough to afford a down payment. And with some of the highest property taxes in the country, it's difficult for many to stay in their homes. Renters are also struggling to keep to keep up. Experts tell us not to spend more than 30% of our income on rent, but nationally, more than a third of households exceed that. To meet that 30% metric in New Jersey, full-time workers need to make over $30 an hour simply to afford a two-bedroom rental. That's untenable. We've seen how the housing affordability crisis contributes to homelessness, which increased 24% in my state from 2023 to 2024, just in that 1 year. Beyond the affordability, accessing safe housing is also a challenge in my district. Almost 2/3 of New Jersey housing was built before the lead paint lead-based paint was banned. My hometown, my hometown of Paterson, has one of the highest level of in the state of children with elevated blood level blood lead levels. As you know, lead exposures in children is linked to learning behaviors, hearing and speech problems, which can earn certainly affect the academic environment as well as their achievement. Ensuring that every child grow up in a lead-free home is a smart investment in the future and the right thing to do. I encourage the committee to prioritize legislation that will help build new homes and rental units, particularly in the area near public transportation, make existing housing safer, like through lead remediation, help low- and middle-income people afford rent and provide for their ability to provide a down payment, especially for seniors and families with children, and promote fair housing practices so every American has a fair shot at buying or renting a home. And while I am here, I would also like to encourage this committee to renew and reform the National Flood Insurance Program. Homeowners across my district in New Jersey, from the Meadowlands to the Passaic River Basin, remember the devastation from hurricanes like Irene and Sandy like it was just yesterday. Our neighbors saw their entire lives swept away in just an instant, instant. I encourage the committee to advance legislation to make the program more affordable and fair. We need safeguards to stop premiums from being raised to unaffordable levels. We need accurate maps and flood prevention investments. We need to strengthen the claims process so survivors can get what they need to rebuild. Flood victims are counting on Congress to make our flood insurance program better. I look forward, Mr. Chairman, to working with the committee on this issue and in any other way to support the residents of New Jersey's 9th Congressional District. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before this committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Thank you, Representative Pou. Thank you for your time today. We'll now turn to member questions. Let me begin that. Let me start with Mr. Downing. You referenced and if one were to eliminate the Federal Insurance Office, that you thought one of the key functions that it had was representing the U.S. in international fora for insurance oversight. How would you see that being handled were the FIO office eliminated?

Rep. Troy Downing (R-MT)SPEAKER_05

Mr. Chair, thank you for your question. On the very narrow part of that where they are dealing with covered contracts, with the very, very narrow part where we do need to deal with international issues, I believe that that could be an appointee under Treasury. I think that could be a person that handled that part, and that would solve the problem with the life companies that do have international exposure. And I think that that person should also take the seat that FIO currently has on FSOC. And so that would also have that insurance representation on FSOC, as well as being the international. The problem is, is that FIO historically did not consult with the actual insurance regulators, the state regulators. And so the NAIC, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, their toes were stepped on figuratively by FIO misrepresenting what mattered to these state regulators. And so that's the huge issue. But the one thing where I do, as you pointed out, believe we need to solve is to have that one spot on the international representation, which I believe can be an appointee under Treasury.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

So you also make the point that your view of the insurance expert that's at Treasury now in the FIO office is not regularly consulting with the insurance commissioners around the country. How could they be representative on the Financial Stability Oversight Board if they weren't taking the pulse of our insurance commissioners around the country?

Rep. Troy Downing (R-MT)SPEAKER_05

And that that is the key to the problem. You know, when the start of my discontent as an insurance commissioner was that the U.S. markets were misrepresented. And so a lot of us took the time and effort to start attending IAIS, the International Association of Insurance Supervisors meetings, making sure that we were monitoring that so that they had a voice independent of of of FIO. And that was the start of my discontent. But where I really realized that there was a problem is I—first of all, FIO, I don't believe, should have subpoena power over insurance companies. And when they started to push the last administration's aspirations on Green New Deal issues, they started doing data calls from domestic insurers, which was disruptive and expensive to the domestic insurers. And in my opinion, it was a usurpation of the states' authority to regulate their own markets.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Well, thank you. I appreciate that feedback very much. Representative McBride, on your suggestions, and we— this committee is frequently concerned about consumer protection and proper disclosure, and you bring up good issues with your bill that you propose with Young Kim. Can you tell us just what either the states attorney general, or just pick Delaware as an example, just some egregious issues around the loophole you describe? And has it gotten worse over the years due to technology, or what what's risen to the occasion now where you think this is important for this fix?

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE)SPEAKER_02

Well, thank you for that question, Mr. Chairman, and it's a good one because the current consumer protections were written at in a period of time where the main method for these CROs to communicate with consumers was through telephones. But with the advent of the internet, these CROs are now utilizing digital communications, which evades the consumer protections that exist. So the protections, while well-intended, are obviously hollow in those communication methods. We have seen actions by both states and the federal government over the last several years to challenge some of these abusive practices. The CFPB did receive, I believe, a $2 billion settlement as a result of taking to task these CROs, but until we have clarity, until we have this loophole closed, we're going to see a lot of constituents continue to face the situation where they're paying these upfront fees and the CROs either make progress, fake progress, the illusion of progress, or just don't even provide the service at all. And so I believe closing this loophole, modernizing these protections, and guaranteeing that the financial institutions are no longer jammed with duplicative requests so that they can focus on actual, genuine credit report issues, it'll make sure that the entire system works better.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Appreciate that. Appreciate your advocacy. And Congresswoman Pou, thank you for your advocacy for housing. It's a top issue for all the members across the country, particularly in high-cost markets like New Jersey. So we look forward to having that as a priority during the course of of our committee. I yield back my questions. I ask my friend from California, would yield time to him, 5 minutes for questions if you have some for this panel.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

I do. Mr. Downing, thank you for your experience in insurance. At a very minimum, we've got to get the FIO to consult with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. Whether I'll go as far as your bill, I'm going to have to to think through. Ms. McBride, thank you for— and I look forward— I want to read your bill, but I think I'm going to co-sponsor it because you have hit on a very important area where consumers are being abused. Ms. Pou, I share a lot of concerns from your district. I also represent a very high-cost area, and we need hundreds of thousands of additional housing units in Los Angeles County. And share your concerns about disasters because I represent the Pacific Palisades. I'll point out that I have always supported flood insurance even though Los Angeles is the most important city in the world built in a desert, but I still support flood insurance. And I would hope that this talk from the White House that Los Angeles's horrendous natural disasters, fires, should be ignored by the federal government just because he doesn't like our governor is is a huge problem, and one that you might face depending upon who's elected governor of your state. And I look forward to Congress reclaiming its role and saying that when we establish a program and it's supposed to treat all 50 states equally, that we don't have an administration choosing to ignore certain states for political reasons. With that, I yield back.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Chairman yields back. I want to thank our first panel for your participation. Your statements will be made part of our record. We really appreciate your advocacy, and thanks for sharing your time today. Give us a moment. We'll suspend for a moment while we change panels. Come back to order. What a distinction it is to see these three distinguished members of our committee testifying on Member Day. We thank each of you for taking time to come back to the hearing room today. Each of you will be recognized for 5 minutes to give an oral presentation of your testimony, and of course, without objection, your written statements and any other material may be part of the record. We'll start from my left, and we'll start with Mr. Cleaver, and you're recognized for— I mean, I'm sorry, Mr. Sherman, you're recognized for 5 minutes.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

got a whole package of bills that I'm sure the chair would want to mark up. The first is the Bank Safety Act that focuses on the problem where banks invest in long-term, often Treasuries, and treat it as if there's no risk. If the Treasuries go up in value, they can sell the Treasuries, have a huge profit, and then announce bonuses for their board and executives. But if the Treasuries go down, they just don't do anything and continue for regulatory purposes to list the Treasuries at their original purchase price. And they're allowed to do this even for Treasuries and other bond instruments that are in the account of held for sale. So they're holding these instruments for sale, they go down in value, and they treat them as if they still had the original value. This is exactly what Silicon Valley Bank did, and that's why we don't have Silicon Valley Bank. More banks will do exactly this. Not only that, there's a fight for capital between the small business that wants to borrow a loan from the bank and the bank's opportunity to invest in long-term securities on the stock market. If they invest in business loans, there's very little interest rate risk because they tend to be short-term loans or adjustable rate. There's a credit risk, and the bank examiners are all over them, looking at that credit risk. If you invest in the long-term bonds, there's an interest rate risk, and we have a don't-look-at-it policy toward that interest rate risk. So banks have a strong reason to say no to Main Street. Then I've got a package of bills dealing with China. One is outside the jurisdiction of this committee, but certainly we should not be providing a capital gains allowance or step-up in basis for those Americans who invest in Chinese, Russian, Belarus, or Iranian stocks. Second, I've got—and this I think is one that the chairman may be very interested in, and that is the China Risk Reporting Act. If we're going to inform investors, we have to tell them what risk the company has because of its involvement in China. We've seen a possible breakdown in the China relationship in the last few months, and China may invade Taiwan and/or blockade it, and that would create such a rift. Investors deserve to know. But also under this bill, the company would have to show what it is doing to de-risk and decouple. America's biggest corporations should be looking at reducing their China risk. The next act would say that you cannot buy stock in companies that we're sanctioning. There are 144 companies that the federal government is sanctioning where their stock is available for purchase by Americans. And finally, the No China Index Funds Act. Index funds do not have the capacity to evaluate these unique Chinese risks. And furthermore, these index funds are investing not in Chinese stocks, but in variable interest entities that then have a contractual relationship from the Cayman Islands to the Chinese company. So you're being told that you're investing in the biggest companies in the world, and you're not investing in Alibaba of China. You're investing in Alibaba, Cayman Islands, a completely different entity. Two things on crypto, because there are two things that I think everybody in this committee can agree on in crypto: Crypto should not be bailed out by the American taxpayer, and we shouldn't use taxpayer money to buy crypto assets. So the first one is the No Crypto Bailout Act. I don't want to see a circumstance where all of a sudden, Skibidi Coin or Bitcoin or Trump Coin is diving in value and the people who invested it are somehow claiming that it is a systemically important asset and somehow we should be bailing them out. Even crypto advocates don't think that the taxpayer should play that role. Second is to say no federal investments in crypto. We had just at this panel Jay Powell say he does not have and does not want the authority to buy crypto, but the Treasury does have that authority. Trump has talked about a strategic Bitcoin reserve. The fact is that we should not be investing in crypto. It's high risk, and we're investing in a competitor to the US dollar and giving it credibility by saying that the US dollar is the world's reserve currency and then crypto is a reserve currency for the reserve currency. Pepsi Coke wouldn't do that for Pepsi. We shouldn't do it for crypto. I yield back.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Gentleman yields back. The distinguished ranking member of our Housing and Insurance Subcommittee, Mr. Cleaver, you're recognized for 5 minutes.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO)SPEAKER_01

you, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate very much giving us an opportunity to present our ideas. And I currently, as you mentioned, serve as ranking member on the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance. In the 119th Congress, the subcommittee held three housing hearings. Several bipartisan bills, including legislation I've worked on to address exclusionary zoning, support manufactured housing, and the preservation of rural housing, were noticed. The affordable housing crisis is fundamentally a supply and demand imbalance. Communities of all sizes need stronger public and private partnerships to preserve existing units and to bring millions of more new units online. On April 8th, the oversight committee—this committee also heard from the HUD IG. Much of the IG's testimony spoke to HUD's lack of capacity to address challenges. I echo Ranking Member Waters in stressing the importance of HUD Secretary Turner appearing before our members, before this committee. Last Congress, during a Democratic administration, I supported the HUD Accountability Act, which would require annual testimony from the HUD Secretary. This Congress, during a Republican administration, Congressman Lawler and I introduced this legislation. Cuts to HUD programs and staff are damaging and create bottlenecks, not efficiency. Congress needs to provide the necessary oversight improvements and resources. USDA also increases access to housing in rural areas. Congressman Nunn of Iowa and I are leading the Rural Housing Service Reform Act, which would save USDA affordable housing, affordable homeownership, and rental programs. These are constructive directions for the committee. Importantly, there is a bipartisan agreement that housing has been overregulated. State and local regulations drive up costs

SPEAKER_UNKNOWN

and

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO)SPEAKER_01

and make federal investments less effective. I'm sure that you're probably surprised to hear someone from my background saying that, but the federal government has also conditioned investments on compliance with massive amounts of additional regulations. In some cases, the cost of these requirements exceeds the funding provided. Housing programs include regulations related to achieving public benefits related to such issues as minimum wage rates, environmental protection, or the sourcing of materials— sourcing of materials, excuse me. I support positive outcomes in these areas. However, I distinguish process from outcomes. The compliance process for achieving these outcomes is so burdensome that it can take years and exorbitant amounts of time and capital to execute an affordable housing project. This is something that Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson wrote at length about in their million-seller book called Abundance. I strongly urge every one of my colleagues to read that book. In many cases, particularly when uncoordinated rules for each different program and agency are placed on small nonprofits, public housing authorities, and minority housing developers, the ancillary public goals are not meaningfully advanced or, in many cases, being harmed. This committee should provide maximum support to efforts led by Subcommittee Chair Flood and myself to strengthen HUD programs. This includes efforts to update HUD's HOME and CDBG programs. These programs are critically important to increasing housing supply in local communities. We have advocates, industry, and government in agreement that common-sense reforms can be made. I urge this committee to help facilitate constructive engagement with the administration in that process. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to testify.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Thank you, Mr. Cleaver. Mr. Cleaver yields back. Gentleman from Texas, Mr. Green, you're recognized for 5 minutes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_03

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I greatly appreciate this privilege and would like to indicate that there are several pieces of legislation pending. The original legislation awarding a Congressional Gold Medal collectively to Africans and their descendants enslaved in our country from August 20th, 1619 to December 6th, 1865. Mr. Chairman, in 1956, Congress, in its infinite wisdom, awarded a Congressional Gold Medal to Confederate soldiers. We have never given the proper respect that they have richly earned by virtue of sacrificing their lives for this country, and I'm talking about the enslaved. I think it's time that they receive treatment similar to what the Confederate soldiers received, a Congressional Gold Medal. By the way, this is not reparations. This is a means of saying we are expressing our appreciation. The Reforming Disaster Recovery Act is a piece of legislation that Ms. Wagner and I co-authored. She initially had it and passed it to me, and we passed it back and forth. We passed it out of the House. The most significant thing that the legislation does is this: it codifies a process. Currently, after each disaster, we reinvent the wheel. We lose institutional knowledge. It makes it difficult to move efficaciously, quickly to deal with some of the needs of people who are suffering from a disaster that they did not cause. The Shielding Community Banks from Systemic Risk Assessment Act, this is a piece of legislation that would help us with the small banks. The community banks, they don't create these huge problems that impact society, cause these systemic risks, but they have to pay for the actions of others. And that seems to be fairly consistent. I'm sure you'll find an example someplace where they were involved to some extent, but I think that we should do something to help these small banks. The Systemic Risk Authority Transparency Act would require financial regulators to issue a report following the use of a systemic risk exception. We just had this piece of legislation before the committee, and I'm very honored to say that Mr. Barr was very instrumental in helping this to get back to the committee and to get passed at the committee level. My trust and belief is that we should get it to the floor. This is a very valuable piece of legislation. It gives the public information about things that we should know, and they need to know as well. The Financial Compensation for CFPB Whistleblowers Act would require the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to provide awards to whistleblowers who come forward with evidence of wrongdoing. It really is legislation that would incentivize whistleblowers to reveal evidence of unlawful activity. And I think that we all want to make sure that people who commit crimes, make sure they're prosecuted. The Housing Fairness Act, another piece of legislation of importance, would expand the efforts to detect and address discrimination. There is still discrimination, invidious discrimination, in housing, and we have a program of testing with this legislation that would help us identify and to give people first a chance to correct their behavior. And if not, then some additional action can be taken. But the identification usually is enough to cause people to see that they should atone for transgressions. The Fair Lending for All Act would create an Office of Fair Lending Testing within the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to expose invidious discrimination and hold predatory financial institutions and individuals accountable. This office would test financial institutions for compliance with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and this is quite similar to how the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity tests for compliance with the Fair Housing Act. I close with this, Mr. Chairman: of all of this, and I think it's all important,

SPEAKER_UNKNOWN

but

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_03

given that the people who were enslaved for almost 2 and a half centuries have never been respected, it just seems to me that it's about time for us to accord them respect And what better way than to do for them what we did for the Confederate soldiers? I thank you. I yield back.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

gentleman yields back. We'll now turn to questions, and let me start first with you, Mr. Green. And I want to thank you for your work for, I guess, six or eight years, maybe longer, with Congresswoman Wagner about this HUD disaster fund issue, disaster recovery money that's in the HUD bureau in our jurisdiction. It, as it turns out, as you well know, but I think the record should show, it's never been authorized. It was essentially at one time a supplemental appropriation, and we've obviously refilled its coffers since after disasters. But I want to commend you on trying to put some clear, more transparent rules of the road around this program and how it might work. Appreciate the gentlewoman from Missouri's work as well. Is there some way it could be beneficial before a disaster in terms of a use by a city as opposed to only after a disaster? So much of our resilience money is only spent or targeted after the fact, and then from the testimony in this committee, it's frequently the auditing on that money and the supervision of that money and the oversight of that money is frequently lacking. So in your conversations, is there any way that we could think about that resilience funding be available to a city before they actually had a disaster?

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_03

Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank you again for acknowledging Ms. Wagner. She was a real champion in working to get this done. The legislation currently would help the smaller cities understand the process. I think that's important too, because when the disaster hits, they find themselves trying to compile information, acquire empirical evidence of what they should do. And it is very difficult at that time when you have this disaster that you're dealing with to acquire information. Now, a city like Houston, which is huge, we have departments that can deal with these things, but they still need the help that we can accord. I think that, yes, to be more specific, we should, if we can, keep a coffer that has an amount of funds in it, to be determined, that would give us the opportunity to move quickly with the immediate needs, the immediate needs, and thereafter we can deal with the long-term needs. I would be more than honored to work with the Chairman to facilitate the development of this idea such that we might bring it to the committee at some point in the future.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

Thank you. And I had one other follow-up question for you on your community bank FDIC assessment bill. Tell me again how it's structured. Does it lower the assessments for the smaller community banks and shift those assessments to larger banks? I wasn't quite sure your how it how it was structured.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_03

Well, I don't want to say it shifts it.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

I want

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_03

to believe that it is placed where it should be because the community banks are— they're not really creating systemic risk. They're small. But now, granted, in number they are large. But in terms of being capitalized, they're compared to the, the major banks, they're, they're insignificant. So I just think that they, they don't assume responsibility for things that they don't create.

Chairman French Hill (R-AR)SPEAKER_06

I appreciate that. I want to thank each of you for your advocacy today for these specific bill ideas, from foreign policy to crypto to housing to housing affordability to fair lending and community banks. I want to thank you each, and let me yield back. Mr. Downing, do you have any questions? Mr. Downing doesn't have any questions, so I want to thank our panel for being with us this afternoon. Without objection, all members will have 5 legislative days to submit additional written questions to the witnesses to the chair. Questions will be forwarded to the witnesses for the response. Witnesses, please respond no later than July 29th, 2025. And with that, our Member Day hearing is adjourned.